GUIDE: Best PC Software, Most FREE!
I seem to build or rebuild a Windows hard drive regularly (like again today), so here’s my updated list of what to install.
Last Update: 03.09.2013
Changes:
NYT is ready for a Brave New World
The New York Time (as always) is advocating controversial science with no need for public debate.
In an editorial yesterday, the Times editors attempted to calm any doubts or fears about the creation of chimeras (animal-human hybrids).
There’s no problem they assured us. Researchers just want to try to find cures for all our diseases. Stem cell research using chimeras will solve every health problem we’ve ever had. All they want to do is implant human brain stem cells into mice and see how they react. That’s all. Who knows what would really be going on there, but don’t worry just let the scientist do their jobs.
Pascal’s Wager – Part II: debunking the ‘all religions are equally improbable’ ruse
In Part I, I generalized that, since the impact of being wrong about God is high, it doesn’t matter how unlikely it is, it is still a high risk.
But that oversimplification is not entirely true. Â If it was, that would mean that all unconfirmable claims about the life to come, by any and all religions, would be equally binding, or just as important or risky.
If the Biblical God makes demands with consequences we can not confirm with empiricism, are they any different from the claims of Buddhism, Islam, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
What we really need is a better measure of how likely such claims are to be true. Â Can that be done without direct empirical evidence? Â YES. Â We must not ignore historical, ethical, and logical support for or against faith claims, and in so doing, discriminate between pretenders and contenders.
Below, I address this objection, which can be stated The lack of empirical support for faith means ALL FAITHS ARE EQUALLY IMPROBABLE and on par with fairy tales.
How to ignore evidence contrary to your scientific position
In discussing Global Warming Alarmism (GWA), I have begun to see a pattern of evasion emerge among GWA proponents. It is an alarming (pun intended) anti-reason, anti-intellectual tactic that is often engaged in by those in the majority position of an argument. These tools for evading reasoned discussion are the logical fallacies of fait accompli and false analogy.
1. Fait accompli
This French phrase is used to represent “an accomplished, presumably irreversible deed or fact.” The way this is used as a logical fallacy is to say that everyone who matters agrees on one position – “it’s already settled among smart people” goes the rhetoric.
Any significant objection from people who obviously DO matter (like fellow scientists, or those who formerly held the favored position) is rejected as spurious and marginal. Any new or controversial data coming from dissenters is not addressed directly, but rejected out of hand as from insignificant sources with personal axes to grind (another typical evasion , ad hominem)
2. False Analogy
The second fallacy commonly used by the arrogant, unreasoning majority is a specious comparison to something that really is established – phrases such as “evolution is as proven as gravity” are often used. Or in the case of global warming, “the link between human CO2 and global warming is as sure as the link between smoking and lung cancer.”
When the majority refuses to engage in reasoned discussion when its talking points are threatened by new or contradictory data, it is now involved in the political battle to maintain the status quo, rather than science and reason. If it spews out canned answers which have been countered, and it refuses to address the counter arguments, it has ceased being responsible and reasonable. It has become committed to a specific ideology, not reason, science, and truth.
Both of these logical fallacies could be considered an appeal to authority rather than reason, just like the religionist who says “the inerrant bible says so” – GWA’s say “the inerrant scientific consensus says so” – even while the consensus is being challenged by many well-credentialed scientists who USED to be GWAs – they didn’t change for personal gain, but often at significant personal loss, because they were scientists who looked at the data without the bias of eco-fear alarmism.
Welcome to modern eco-politics. It’s going to be a long, hot summer. But GWAs already knew that ;)
GUIDE: How to change the default properties for new MS Excel 2003 workbooks
If you get tired of having to always delete the extra blank worksheets in a new excel workbook, or tire of having to set up the same headers and footers you always do, you can just change your default workbook to match your preferences. Below, I give you two methods.
Science as Salvation – A Cautionary Tale
Leon Kass, former chair of the President’s Council on Bioethics from 2002-2005, has a nice lecture on the University Channel Podcast. He is also the author of many books, including Life, Liberty, and the Defense of Dignity: The Challenge for Bioethics.
We are largely unaware that we have, as a society, already embraced the eugenic principle, “defectives shall not be born.” Because our practices are decentralized, and because they operate not by coercion, but by private reproductive choice.
Church Website Ministry – Personas
So, I just finished three days at Web Design World 2006, an annual usability / web design conference here in San Francisco. Of course, near the end of a three day conference, you start to really get mentally tired of listening, and begin to look for ways to amuse yourself. While listening to Jared Spool wax on about what makes users happy, I began to think about how I would design a church web site.
One of the tools NOT covered at this conference, but essential to an information architect in designing a site, is the persona, a “user archetype you can use to help guide decisions about product features, navigation, interactions, and even visual design.” (uie)Â As I sat with wandering mind today, I imaged the personas who might interact with a church website.
The biblical origins of science
One of the great and tragic myths of our time is the materialist view that faith hinders science, and has largely opposed it in the past. AIG has a nice review of For The Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-hunts and the End of Slavery by Rodney Stark, which addresses the revisionist history of science and faith, and how faith, and specifically the Christian faith, is responsible for the science we see today. And here are some quotes, with my headings inserted in bold brown (bold red is my emphasis on their text):
The Story We’ve All Been Told
Even children know that in 1492 Christopher Columbus proved the world is round. They also know that he … [faced] years of opposition from the Roman Catholic Church, which ridiculed all dissent from the biblical teaching that the world is flat. … Andrew Dickson White, founder and first president of Cornell University, and author of the most influential book ever written on the conflict between science and theology, offered this summary:
“… Columbus’ voyage greatly strengthened the theory of the earth’s sphericity [yet] the Church … stumbled and persisted in going astray
… But in 1519 science gains a crushing victory. Magellan makes his famous voyage. He proves the earth to be round, for his expedition circumnavigates it … yet even this does not end the war. Many [religious] men oppose the doctrine for two hundred years longer.”
Creating Online Community
Robert over at echurch.com is asking about creating and supporting community within churches. He has mentioned funtionality similar to linkedin.com, as well as making other community and event functions available online. Robert, I have the following contributions to make:
GUIDE: Books on Christianity and Science
Here’s my list of resources for those interested in the history of religion and science, both pro and anti-religious.
THEIST
For the Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts, and the End of Slavery by Rodney Stark
Stark argues that faith in God encouraged Christians to invent science. Having read other books making the same claim, I think Stark’s approach to this question is one of the best. Not only does he go over the development of technology in the so-called “Dark Ages,” and show how the “Enlightenment” picture of Copernican era science is a myth, he studies 52 key early scientists, and shows that more than 60 % were “devout,” while only 2 were skeptics. The critic below who asks why Christianity did not produce science in Russia did not read attentively: Stark argues that faith in God was a necessary, but not sufficient, cause of the rise of science. Other factors were also involved. ~ From this excellent review
Guide: Best Android Apps
Here’s my list of favorites. Feel free to comment, and bookmark this page, I will update regularly, I’m always testing. Thanks!
Last Updated: 07.23.12
Updates:
- I have stopped updating this page, but have created a new public list of my favorite android apps at appbrain.com
Why no empirical test for God? Perhaps quantum science will provide it
Atheists are full of good questions, one of which was recently broached at Common Sense Atheism in the post A question online theists refuse to answer? – that question is
‘Can you prove to me that God exists in a way that will also show that Zeus does not?’
I initially responded by citing my series on Pascal’s Wager, explaining that, while there is no direct empirical evidence for the existence (or non-existence!) of God, there are plenty of other methods for showing a difference in the believability of the various Gods.
One atheist responded that I had missed the point, writing:
What you *really* want here is an experimental test. Show us this goddy thing, and let us fire protons at it.
So let me take another stab at it – rather than giving him the sensible argument I gave (there is no empirical test, but that does not mean that we don’t have other methods by which to distinguish between metaphysical claims), I’ll try another valid one – that is, empirical science is not yet able to measure the spiritual – it can barely quantify, measure, or understand the psychological realm, so what makes us think we can evaluate the spiritual?
Podcast: Play in new window
Motorola DROID Pros and Cons
Here's my review of the phone so far. For CONS that have a workaround, I inserted a *. I'll cover them in a future post on software for the DROID. Potential deal-breakers in red.
PROS:
- Beautiful high resolution screen
- Smooth scrolling
- Good implementation of virtual keyboard
- Browser does zoom well (though no pinch)
- Good selection of free apps
- Good video recorder w/ easy upload to YouTube
- Vibrating feedback works well
- Free Google turn by turn Navigation
- Fast processor, very responsive
- Bigger screen, small form factor – same width as iPhone, not much longer, same thickness.
One device to rule them all? The Motorola Droid
This has nothing to do with the Bible or God, but I had to blog on it. I am nearing the end of my ATT wireless contract, and am a gadget geek looking for a new phone. There are so many phones either coming or just arrived that are so tempting, including the
But today I found out about the Motorola Droid, the first Verizon phone to use the Google Android operating system, coming November 6th!
But what really wins my heart over is that I can replace SIX electronic devices with this one device, and the last is just radical – besides being a
- phone
- 5Mp camera
- DVD-quality video recorder (720×480 resolution)
- portable media player
- GPS navigator (it is the first to come with Google Maps™ Navigation – free turn-by-turn directions!!)
if you buy the multimedia dock (pictured) it can charge while being your alarm clock!!!
I am smitten! More gushing after the jump.
What do NDEs tell us about the reality of mind, God, and the afterlife?
I just finished listening to a really interesting hour long podcast of a lecture by Gary Habermas, author of Beyond Death: Exploring the Evidence for Immortality, a "Christian" look at Near Death Experiences (NDEs).
What was interesting about the lecture is that Habermas focuses on what events that patients report happened in the REAL world while they were dead – things that can be corroborated. In other words, while they are brain dead or heart dead for long periods of time, they report things that they could not have heard or seen, in the locale of their body or elsewhere.
This begs the question – if their physical body and memory are inactive, who or what is experiencing and seeing events in the physical world? This argues for the existence of mind, or spirit, apart from mere physicality – i.e. there is more to existence than materialists might claim. [Link to lecture after the jump]
Palm Pre v. iPhone in Short Sentences
There
have been lots of blog posts across the inet comparing these two
industry leading phones. I had to compare them before I finally bit
the bullet and dove in. Here's my short version comparing the two.
Why Us?: How Science Rediscovered the Mystery of Ourselves
ID the Future has a nice two part interview with Dr. James Le Fanu, author of Why Us?: How Science Rediscovered the Mystery of Ourselves. Le Fanu, a scientist and science writer, discusses the inability of evolution to even come close to explaining the complexity of humanity. He doesn’t reject evolution, he only explains that its explanatory power is vastly inferior to the problems presented.
This book appears as much science as philosophy of science, but another thoughtful book considering the limitations, perhaps even the fallibility of evolutionary origins.
“Hypercosmic God” in “non-material realm”
French physicist and philosopher of science Bernard d’Espagnat recently was awarded the Templeton Prize, the largest annual prize in the world, which seeks to reconcile faith and science. What makes d’Espagnat’s work noteworthy, particularly to the Templeton Foundation is the contention that a “veiled reality” exists behind the science.
Religion, innovation and economic progress – Part II
This symposium covered the positive impact of Protestant Christianity on economics and innovation in history. In contrasted the various world views to show which were most influential and why.
In Part I, I covered the comments of Lawrence Hamilton, Director, Cultural Change Institute and Lecturer, the Fletcher School, Tufts University, who discussed the economic progress of nations based on their predominant ideologies. Today, I review the comments of Robert Woodberry, Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, University of Texas at Austin.
Gravitas publishes ‘framework-agnostic’ science textbooks
Casey Luskin has a nice 13 minute interview with Rebecca W. Keller, founder of Gravitas Publications, which publish a series of science books for homeschoolers called Real Science 4 Kids. By ‘framework-agnostic’, I mean that she presents science and scientific methods withOUT committing to any specific philosophy-of-science framework like evolution, creationism, or ID. Or in her words:
I believe that the best science is rigorous and objective about the
facts, but open and tolerant of what those facts may mean both to
science and outside of science. In other words, we should be diligent
to practice science rigorously and carefully utilizing the scientific
method and critical thinking. But we should allow everyone to interpret
those facts through their own lens.Intelligent design is an interpretative framework for evaluating
scientific data as are evolutionary theory and creationism. Each are
different lenses used to understand and interpret scientific
information.
